Hi all,I am a contributor to Apache Bigtop <http://bigtop.apache.org> and have aquestion for you.Bigtop is a TLP responsible for performing packaging and interoperabilitytesting of various projects in the Hadoop ecosystem, including Apache Pig.

We are planning to include Pig 0.11 in our soon to be released Bigtop 0.6distribution. However, while upgrading Pig from 0.10 to 0.11, I wasn't ableto compile Pig 0.11.1 on RPM basedsystems<http://bigtop01.cloudera.org:8080/view/Bigtop-trunk/job/Bigtop-trunk-Pig/313/label=centos6/console>.There doesn't seem to be anything Bigtop specific here, I would expect thisissue to impact all Pig users. It seems like Pig's contrib sub-project usesthe system's default encoding for compiling code; however on RPM basedsystems, the default encoding is not suitable and breaks the build. Icreated PIG-3262 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PIG-3262> to trackthis and Cheolsoo graciously committed this to Pig trunk. The essence ofBigtop is exactly to find integration issues like this.

Now, I do realize that Bill and the community has done some excellent workin putting together 0.11.1. Perhaps, I am a little too late to ask thisquestion but I thought I'd ask it anyway. Is there a possibility that thePig community can release a new release candidate for 0.11.1 with the fixin PIG-3262?

The pros:1. It would allow Pig users to compile Pig contrib on RPM machines(RHEL/CentOS 5, 6, SLES 11, Fedora, etc.) which doesn't seem to be possibleas of now.2. It would enable Apache Bigtop 0.6 to include a Pig version that buildson all OS variants.

The cons:1. There is a cost of cutting out another release candidate to the Pigcommunity. I completely understand and appreciate the cost involved;however, I would anticipate the cost to be minimal since a) thechange<https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12575962/PIG-3262.2.patch>isquite trivial; b) the change only affects the contrib functionalityandnot the "core" functionality, per se.

If we do decide to release another release candidate, I would be more thanhappy to perform integration testing on it by means of Apache Bigtop.

I do realize the unfortunate timing of this email, it would have been idealif we were having this conversation a week ago while the vote was stillgoing on. I will try to change that in future so please do accept myapologies in advance.

Thanks for the work you're doing to support Pig in BigTop. Starting withPig 0.12, our release process will be simplified to not include rpm/debpackages, thanks to BigTop.

I've built Pig on a multiple RHEL versions so this issue might not be asbroadly spanning as you describe. The RPMs for 0.11.0 and 0.11.1 were bothbuilt on rhel5 instances from ec2 (ami-2d8e4c44).

While I don't mind putting together another release, I think we shouldproceed to release 0.11.1rc0 for the following reasons:

- since the vote passed and to respect the time people put intesting/validating this release- 0.11.1 contains support for Hadoop 0.20.2 and other critical bug fixes,which people are anxious for. For fairness to those stakeholders, thesefixes were not put into a 0.11.0 RC when discovered late in that releaseprocess.- Pig 0.11.1 will contain an RPM as part of it's release artifacts.

That said, if the Pig community feels strongly that we should cancel therelease and re-issue a new one, I'm fine with shepherding that process.As an alternative is it possible for you to build by setting the defaultencoding externally? Or could you apply this patch to the pig 0.11.1 distro?

> Hi all,> I am a contributor to Apache Bigtop <http://bigtop.apache.org> and have a> question for you.> Bigtop is a TLP responsible for performing packaging and interoperability> testing of various projects in the Hadoop ecosystem, including Apache Pig.>> We are planning to include Pig 0.11 in our soon to be released Bigtop 0.6> distribution. However, while upgrading Pig from 0.10 to 0.11, I wasn't able> to compile Pig 0.11.1 on RPM based> systems<> http://bigtop01.cloudera.org:8080/view/Bigtop-trunk/job/Bigtop-trunk-Pig/313/label=centos6/console> >.> There doesn't seem to be anything Bigtop specific here, I would expect this> issue to impact all Pig users. It seems like Pig's contrib sub-project uses> the system's default encoding for compiling code; however on RPM based> systems, the default encoding is not suitable and breaks the build. I> created PIG-3262 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PIG-3262> to track> this and Cheolsoo graciously committed this to Pig trunk. The essence of> Bigtop is exactly to find integration issues like this.>> Now, I do realize that Bill and the community has done some excellent work> in putting together 0.11.1. Perhaps, I am a little too late to ask this> question but I thought I'd ask it anyway. Is there a possibility that the> Pig community can release a new release candidate for 0.11.1 with the fix> in PIG-3262?>> The pros:> 1. It would allow Pig users to compile Pig contrib on RPM machines> (RHEL/CentOS 5, 6, SLES 11, Fedora, etc.) which doesn't seem to be possible> as of now.> 2. It would enable Apache Bigtop 0.6 to include a Pig version that builds> on all OS variants.>> The cons:> 1. There is a cost of cutting out another release candidate to the Pig> community. I completely understand and appreciate the cost involved;> however, I would anticipate the cost to be minimal since a) the> change<> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12575962/PIG-3262.2.patch> >is> quite trivial; b) the change only affects the contrib functionality> and> not the "core" functionality, per se.>> If we do decide to release another release candidate, I would be more than> happy to perform integration testing on it by means of Apache Bigtop.>> I do realize the unfortunate timing of this email, it would have been ideal> if we were having this conversation a week ago while the vote was still> going on. I will try to change that in future so please do accept my> apologies in advance.>> Regards,> Mark>

On Sun, Mar 31, 2013 at 11:42 AM, Bill Graham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:> Thanks for the work you're doing to support Pig in BigTop. Starting with> Pig 0.12, our release process will be simplified to not include rpm/deb> packages, thanks to BigTop.

On a related note -- we're trying to work on a model where Bigtopcould be utilized as RC (and pre-RC) integration validation framework.The gist of the idea is pretty simple -- we're planning to use thelast stable build of Bigtop (e.g. 0.6.0) and keep revving up onesingle component (lets say Pig) following the trunk/branch development.Hopefully that way all the integration problems could be uncoveredearlier in the game.

Drop us a note if you guys would be interested. This is, obviously,a two way street -- Bigtop can provide the framework, but weneed your expertise in triaging problems as they arise.

> I've built Pig on a multiple RHEL versions so this issue might not be as> broadly spanning as you describe. The RPMs for 0.11.0 and 0.11.1 were both> built on rhel5 instances from ec2 (ami-2d8e4c44).

Roman and Mark,Joining Bill here in thanking you for BigTop and all the integration workyou guys do.

Since this issue came up so late (after the vote), and, while it doesaffect people trying to build an rpm, does not affect people just using Pigjars, etc, I'd move to release 0.11.1 and consider the changes for 0.11.2.I suspect we'll have a .2 release -- 0.12 has a lot of new stuff, so peoplewill likely stay on 11 for a while waiting for 12 to stabilize, and we'llsee more bugfix patches.

Using BigTop to validate an RC automatically would be great, let us knowwhat we can do to make that happen.

> Hi Bill!>> Thanks a million for chiming in!>> On Sun, Mar 31, 2013 at 11:42 AM, Bill Graham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote:> > Thanks for the work you're doing to support Pig in BigTop. Starting with> > Pig 0.12, our release process will be simplified to not include rpm/deb> > packages, thanks to BigTop.>> On a related note -- we're trying to work on a model where Bigtop> could be utilized as RC (and pre-RC) integration validation framework.> The gist of the idea is pretty simple -- we're planning to use the> last stable build of Bigtop (e.g. 0.6.0) and keep revving up one> single component (lets say Pig) following the trunk/branch development.> Hopefully that way all the integration problems could be uncovered> earlier in the game.>> Drop us a note if you guys would be interested. This is, obviously,> a two way street -- Bigtop can provide the framework, but we> need your expertise in triaging problems as they arise.>> > I've built Pig on a multiple RHEL versions so this issue might not be as> > broadly spanning as you describe. The RPMs for 0.11.0 and 0.11.1 were> both> > built on rhel5 instances from ec2 (ami-2d8e4c44).>> Here's the map of affected Linux platforms:>> http://bigtop01.cloudera.org:8080/view/Bigtop-trunk/job/Bigtop-trunk-Pig/>> Feel free to see the build logs. Also, if you, interested, I can give> you karma to poke around Bigtop's Jenkins.>> The AMIs are all stock AMIs produced either by the corresponding> Linux vendor (Fedora, OpenSUSE) or RightScale.>> As such, it seems that chance of unsuspecting users running into> this issue with the build are pretty high.>> > That said, if the Pig community feels strongly that we should cancel the> > release and re-issue a new one, I'm fine with shepherding that process.>> It would be extremely appreciated if you guys could go through the trouble> of spinning up a new RC. This is, of course, your decision but we'd be> willing> to help to the extent we can.>> As Mark mentioned -- the risk of the respin is pretty small -- the affected> changes are all build files and they are localized to contrib. Of course,> any RC is quite a bit of work.>> Thanks,> Roman.>

> Roman and Mark,> Joining Bill here in thanking you for BigTop and all the integration work> you guys do.>> Since this issue came up so late (after the vote), and, while it does> affect people trying to build an rpm, does not affect people just using Pig> jars, etc, I'd move to release 0.11.1 and consider the changes for 0.11.2.> I suspect we'll have a .2 release -- 0.12 has a lot of new stuff, so people> will likely stay on 11 for a while waiting for 12 to stabilize, and we'll> see more bugfix patches.>> Using BigTop to validate an RC automatically would be great, let us know> what we can do to make that happen.>> Best,> -D>>> On Sun, Mar 31, 2013 at 8:11 PM, Roman Shaposhnik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:>> > Hi Bill!> >> > Thanks a million for chiming in!> >> > On Sun, Mar 31, 2013 at 11:42 AM, Bill Graham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> > wrote:> > > Thanks for the work you're doing to support Pig in BigTop. Starting> with> > > Pig 0.12, our release process will be simplified to not include rpm/deb> > > packages, thanks to BigTop.> >> > On a related note -- we're trying to work on a model where Bigtop> > could be utilized as RC (and pre-RC) integration validation framework.> > The gist of the idea is pretty simple -- we're planning to use the> > last stable build of Bigtop (e.g. 0.6.0) and keep revving up one> > single component (lets say Pig) following the trunk/branch development.> > Hopefully that way all the integration problems could be uncovered> > earlier in the game.> >> > Drop us a note if you guys would be interested. This is, obviously,> > a two way street -- Bigtop can provide the framework, but we> > need your expertise in triaging problems as they arise.> >> > > I've built Pig on a multiple RHEL versions so this issue might not be> as> > > broadly spanning as you describe. The RPMs for 0.11.0 and 0.11.1 were> > both> > > built on rhel5 instances from ec2 (ami-2d8e4c44).> >> > Here's the map of affected Linux platforms:> >> >> http://bigtop01.cloudera.org:8080/view/Bigtop-trunk/job/Bigtop-trunk-Pig/> >> > Feel free to see the build logs. Also, if you, interested, I can give> > you karma to poke around Bigtop's Jenkins.> >> > The AMIs are all stock AMIs produced either by the corresponding> > Linux vendor (Fedora, OpenSUSE) or RightScale.> >> > As such, it seems that chance of unsuspecting users running into> > this issue with the build are pretty high.> >> > > That said, if the Pig community feels strongly that we should cancel> the> > > release and re-issue a new one, I'm fine with shepherding that process.> >> > It would be extremely appreciated if you guys could go through the> trouble> > of spinning up a new RC. This is, of course, your decision but we'd be> > willing> > to help to the extent we can.> >> > As Mark mentioned -- the risk of the respin is pretty small -- the> affected> > changes are all build files and they are localized to contrib. Of course,> > any RC is quite a bit of work.> >> > Thanks,> > Roman.> >>

NEW: Monitor These Apps!

All projects made searchable here are trademarks of the Apache Software Foundation.
Service operated by Sematext